No to oligarchy in cricket
PCB chairman needs to formulate a strategy along with Sri Lanka and South Africa to counter the Big Three’s...
Handing over administrative control to the Big Three and then expecting others to silently observe this is irrational and will only lead to an unnecessary oligarchy in world cricket. PHOTO: ICC WEBSITE
The cricket world’s governing body, the International Cricket Council (ICC), has recently been presented with a position paper that would formally hand over administrative powers of the game to the cricket boards of three countries — India, England and Australia. Apart from possessing administrative power and controlling cricket’s revenues through their ‘contribution costs’ scheme, mutually-agreed and binding bilateral agreements may also see an end to Pakistan’s hope of staging international cricket any time soon. Understandably, the proposals drew flak from various cricket boards, including Pakistan’s, and will be put to vote in the ICC Executive Board meeting on February 8.
For much of the last decade, or more, the game’s executive decision-making lay with these cricket boards. India’s emergence as a powerhouse came with its financial armoury and its commercialisation. Its proposal to then see a return of investment in the form of power and control is justified, according to its board secretary, Sanjay Patel. England and Australia, the pioneers of the game, have also gone along with this scheme. But handing over administrative control to the Big Three and then expecting others to silently observe this is irrational and will only lead to an unnecessary oligarchy in world cricket. Last-gasp measures and desperate attempts have followed the presenting of the position paper. Its passing could turn out to be disastrous for Pakistan if the country’s cricket board does not play its cards well. Apart from the financial jolt that the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) would need to survive, bilateral agreements between member boards to play each other could virtually mean an end to any hope the country still had to host cricket or even host it in the UAE.
The PCB chairman, as of now, does not seem to be under threat of losing his seat and so needs to formulate a strategy along with Sri Lanka and South Africa to counter the Big Three’s proposals in a manner that will see it protect Pakistan’s interests at the ICC.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 2nd, 2014.
For much of the last decade, or more, the game’s executive decision-making lay with these cricket boards. India’s emergence as a powerhouse came with its financial armoury and its commercialisation. Its proposal to then see a return of investment in the form of power and control is justified, according to its board secretary, Sanjay Patel. England and Australia, the pioneers of the game, have also gone along with this scheme. But handing over administrative control to the Big Three and then expecting others to silently observe this is irrational and will only lead to an unnecessary oligarchy in world cricket. Last-gasp measures and desperate attempts have followed the presenting of the position paper. Its passing could turn out to be disastrous for Pakistan if the country’s cricket board does not play its cards well. Apart from the financial jolt that the Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) would need to survive, bilateral agreements between member boards to play each other could virtually mean an end to any hope the country still had to host cricket or even host it in the UAE.
The PCB chairman, as of now, does not seem to be under threat of losing his seat and so needs to formulate a strategy along with Sri Lanka and South Africa to counter the Big Three’s proposals in a manner that will see it protect Pakistan’s interests at the ICC.
Published in The Express Tribune, February 2nd, 2014.